On 12/29/2014 12:31 PM, Marie Earley wrote:
Is it possible to post some of the stuff that has been mentioned on
here on the GGTF talk page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force
It feels like the two have nothing in common at the moment. There's a
whole load of "why don't we survey women and find out what they like
to edit / give women their own noticeboard / review the scope of the
project" - type rhetoric.
Rather than wade in and argue (it's pointless, I got accused of
'radical feminism' POV pushing for my trouble), can some of the stuff
about grants, meet ups etc. and replies be posted so we can move on,
and all of the "let's rip it up and start again" stuff can make its
way into the archive?
Marie
Everything you see is just a variation of what was happening all summer,
with the pro-GGTF editors managing to keep their tempers against various
attempts by anti-project editors to disrupt the project by trying to
narrow and control the scope (as some women explicitly have complained):
*general nitpicking of statement by a woman/supporter of project that
supports the original vision of being both about increasing number of
articles about women/topics of interest to women and increasing number
of women, including by dealing with issues that turn women off (both
software and behavior issues). (One editor summarized these past
comments here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_Vintage_Feminist/GGTF%27s_re-boot
The comments are being challenged.) And of course various accusations of
defacto sexism for those who complain about this, as Marie alludes to above
*Opposition to the idea of using the page to get other editors to help
with new articles about women unless the articles are already 100% in
compliance with every policy imaginable.
*proposal to divide GGTF into two projects, one for articles about
women, the other for getting more women and "behavior"problems; divide
and conquor is the strategy here and I'm sure the second would quickly
be put up for deletion, widdling the project down to nothing
*proposal to invite anything and everything regarding women (including
perhaps through womens noticeboard), which could be used to water GGTF
down to nothing regarding a gender gap by flooding with less relevant
concerns
*continuing contention that there is no evidence that there's a problem
despite these two existing pages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/research
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias/Gender_gap_task_force/media
It would help if
*Past edits at GGTF show that one or more of the alleged women posting
now are recruits of editors against the project from the arbitration.
We'll see what happens...
CM
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap